New VTOL Aviation Propulsion Systems

[Grav_Moped]

Or a slung load under the craft.

1. Land air/raft on top of box.
2. Connect box to air/raft.
3. Lift off with box slung under air/raft.

When you have a grav vehicle, not everything needs to go "on top" in order to be hauled around ... kind of like with other VTOLs that aren't grav vehicles, y'know?

That's dependent on how the gravity manipulation system works.

You can sling loads if the system is a black box (or boxes) that provide a force in a given direction.

If it's an area/volume effect, the payload may need to be contained within the vehicle.

 

[aramis]

That's dependent on how the gravity manipulation system works.

You can sling loads if the system is a black box (or boxes) that provide a force in a given direction.

If it's an area/volume effect, the payload may need to be contained within the vehicle.

There are several ways of interpreting gravitic thrust. Non-exhaustive list:

1. Simple thrust plate (raises question: is it actually gravititic?)
2. Thrust that acts against a gravity well -
   • multiply generated force by local gravity strength
   • definitely a gravity interaction
3. weight reduction (TTNE Contragrav)
   • essentially makes for bouyancy
   • requires horizontal thrust agency
4. artificial gravity which induces thrust by atmosphere acceleration
   • presumes a local effect
   • implies being shieldable, too.
   • makes slung loads subject to forces much like helicopters
5. artificial gravity well projector (AD Foster - Humanx Commonwealth setting)
6. anti-gravity field (vertical only)
   • reverses sign on gravity within affected region, so clearly gravitic
   • requires horizontal motive force
   • may result in unsecured items falling upwards into airstream and out of field.
7. inertia reduction/disconnection (EE Smith - Lensman setting)
   • there are a number of odd effects that make this less than useful on world - such as launch by simply turning it on while on the retrograde side of the orbit
   • creates a true distinction between dilation effects
     • If dilation is mass increase, this type of drive is FTL capable
     • if dilation is time slowing, drive is not FTL capable
   • requires a movement modality that isn't inertial to be useful for anything other than takeoff.
   • presupposes a privileged frame
8. thrust that pushes straight up only without regard to device orientation
   • definitely gravity interaction
9. Gravity redirection/manipulation
   • very gravitic...
   • thrust limited by local gravity
   • may result in interesting attitudes to keep cargo in...

The art in CT sources tends to imply one of #s 1, 2, or 4.
#s 3 and 8 are visually little different, as both require horizontal thrust mechanisms
#s 5 and 6 can be ruled out from the art - and, given that air/rafts are illiustrated by the playtesters and/or supplement authors... esp. Bill Kieth, who played in Marc's game...
#6 requires forward thrust, too... but also would preclude stacking and slinging - everything not strapped in is in upward freefall.
#5 has tidal effects, preluding stacking, but possibly allowing slinging.

 

[mike wightman]

So art trumps actual vehicle stats as given in the setting?

Air/Raft: Also known as a flier, the air/raft relies on solid state anti-grav modules
for lift and propulsion. Four independent, individually replaceable modules
ensure a maximum of safety, in that each provides one-quarter of the vehicle's total
lift. A standard air/raft masses about four tons and can carry a payload of about
four tons, including the driver and three passengers.

CT S:8 LD A-M

 

[aramis]

So art trumps actual vehicle stats as given in the setting?

GIven that some of the art was by part of the dev team? Not quite trumps, but definitely is part of the canon. And is just as definitional as the text. The text lists capabilities which are, in fact, not inconsistent with the art. Just with certain preconceived notions that are not supported by the art.

"Carry" doesn't require it be inside, other.
You're so fixated on making it a truck that you're ignoring the evidence that it fills the jeep role.
Note that it only allows four people in the description; that implies limited space. (given the canonical dimensions it's very much like the Hummer... but with 4× the total payload weight.
It's not even labeled as a military vehicle in the core; the G-Carrier is.
art in core rules: TTB 52, TTB 111
Possibly also Danforth's work on TTB124

S7 gives us the canonical dimensions by the scale drawing on page 17, and again on 26... but noting that the scale image cannot fit in the allocated space on the A2 deckplans. (unless, of course, it's parked at angle to the deck. Easily cured- just move the walls out a touch)
The seeker buggy is a pressurized version... page 27 & 28... and notes a 3 ton cargo compartment... but the plan shows us that compartment at just under 1.5×1.5×3 m.

The depicted rafts across canon show an open 1.2×2.5m cargo deck behind the seats, Presumably above some of the operational equipment. Not a safe place to put a squad. Maybe 6 men if you rope them down and they're pretty friendly... but that's certainly not a safe way to travel.

So, that 3 or 4 tons isn't equivalent to the 2.5 tons mass allowance on a deuce and a half, with its some 2.5×4m×1.5m of carrier space, which is equipped with benches. (It's also 5.8 tons mass dry and empty...)

Especially since the Air/Raft's mobility is that of a slow helo...

Reducing cargo capacity to a single factor (be it volume or be it mass) is never the whole truth.

 

[Condottiere]

Since Traveller propulsion mostly is conceived from the fundamental understanding and manipulation of gravitational force, some, all or most of the above.

However, for this specific example, I think it floats due to the rejection of local gravity.

 

[kilemall]

Since Traveller propulsion mostly is conceived from the fundamental understanding and manipulation of gravitational force, some, all or most of the above.

However, for this specific example, I think it floats due to the rejection of local gravity.

Rejection is such a harsh word in these times that need sensitivity.

How about 'not constrained by gravity'?

 

[Grav_Moped]

Rejection is such a harsh word in these times that need sensitivity.

How about 'not constrained by gravity'?

It's carefully engineered to throw itself at the ground, and miss.

 

[mike wightman]

In that case maneuver drives are reaction engines since the vast majority of the artwork shows them as such.

 

[Grav_Moped]

In that case maneuver drives are reaction engines since the vast majority of the artwork shows them as such.

You can draw your own conclusion.

 

[Condottiere]

Moving would be falling forward.

 

[Spinward Flow]

since the vast majority of the artwork shows them as such.

You can draw your own conclusion.

Well ... a lot of artwork starts with drawings, yes ...

 

[whartung]

There are several ways of interpreting gravitic thrust.

Well. from a CT perspective there's one thing we "know" about grav (at least in terms of Air/Raft). That's the propulsion is done through a grav module, of which an Air/Raft has several and a Grav Belt has one. The Grav Belt and Air/Raft use the same tech, and whatever the Air/Raft uses for lifting, going, and stopping, is apparently safe enough to bolt to a human being with no ill effects.

 

[Spinward Flow]

The Grav Belt and Air/Raft use the same tech, and whatever the Air/Raft uses for lifting, going, and stopping, is apparently safe enough to bolt to a human being with no ill effects.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Electric.
VTOL.
Jet.